DRS Planning 10 X Mixed Traffic Locos

[ac6000cw]

No .... the likelihood of using HSTs on freight is zero.

It was (mostly) a tongue-in-cheek suggestion (but then the idea of turning LU trains into DMUs came in from left-field too..)

 

[LOL The Irony]

Well 91's were intended for freight use after hours.

 

[Eric1]

DRS don't need a class 20 or 37 replacement. Most nuclear trains only run weekly at the most. The bulk of their work is Intermodal, Ballast trains and other network rail services. A 20 or 37 will be next to useless on these services. A 68 can do these as well as nuclear, passenger and charter services all day long.

 

[Suraggu]

DRS don't need a class 20 or 37 replacement. Most nuclear trains only run weekly at the most. The bulk of their work is Intermodal, Ballast trains and other network rail services. A 20 or 37 will be next to useless on these services. A 68 can do these as well as nuclear, passenger and charter services all day long.

DRS new 20 year business plan states that they will return to focus on core nuclear work, even though NDS, NR seasonal work and domestic Intermodal is still a regular feature.

 

[apk55]

My own thoughts would be slightly lower power class 68 maybe 2MW. Still many uses around the network and there are not many services that require flat out operation for long periods. Possibly twin engine so that on light duties such as flask runs or in engineering possessions one engine could be shut down saving fuel/ engine wear etc. High powered engines running on low power are inefficient and more polluting.

 

[Photohunter71]

I still think it's a new design altogether from either Stadler or Siemens. Yes it makes sense to order more 68's as there is familiarity with drs and no one else has 68's.
But if they're looking as I suspect at a completely new design, I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[gingertom]

Stadler's bumf tells of a Caterpillar CAT175-12 engine, which has 2100kW/2800BHP. A useful output and over 2 tonnes lighter than the 175-16 as fitted to the 68.

 

[Jonny]

Isn't there a six-axle Co-Co version (on paper at least) designed for Cape Gauge that weighs in at a mere 99 tonnes? How easily could it be adapted for the UK?

 

[gingertom]

Isn't there a six-axle Co-Co version (on paper at least) designed for Cape Gauge that weighs in at a mere 99 tonnes? How easily could it be adapted for the UK?

if somebody came along with a sizeable wad of cash for a significant batch I think it would be adapted to UK gauge very easily. If only!

 

[gingertom]

Isn't there a six-axle Co-Co version (on paper at least) designed for Cape Gauge that weighs in at a mere 99 tonnes? How easily could it be adapted for the UK?

if it would fit there's always the CAT175-20 engine, another couple of tonnes but 4700 BHP would shift a lot of loaded wagons. Or a rake of Mk5s at high speed.

 

[Suraggu]

Isn't there a six-axle Co-Co version (on paper at least) designed for Cape Gauge that weighs in at a mere 99 tonnes? How easily could it be adapted for the UK?

Possibly the class 93....

 

[LOL The Irony]

if it would fit there's always the CAT175-20 engine, another couple of tonnes but 4700 BHP would shift a lot of loaded wagons. Or a rake of Mk5s at high speed.

Could do 125 on the ECML. Maybe convert some MK3's to take pallets?

 

[delticdave]

No .... the likelihood of using HSTs on freight is zero.

Using 43's top n' tailing would require MU cables for the freight cars, but if they were regeared for 75/80 mph, fitted with buffers / drawgear & treated as back to back N. American "A" units the concept might make sense.
ISTR that they have lowish axle loading & good route availability, + the existing buffer fitted units have history as locomotives rather than power cars.

 

[apk55]

Using 43's top n' tailing would require MU cables for the freight cars, but if they were regeared for 75/80 mph, fitted with buffers / drawgear & treated as back to back N. American "A" units the concept might make sense.
ISTR that they have lowish axle loading & good route availability, + the existing buffer fitted units have history as locomotives rather than power cars.

As they stand HST power cars have no pulling power. BR in there wisdom fitted the smallest traction motors they could get away with so the maximum tractive effort is 80KN per power car. (In contrast a class 68 has 317KN of tractive effort - 4 times as much.) With anything more than a load of 400 tones per power car (less on a mountain line) there is a real risk of burning out the traction motors (continuous rating only 47KN as against 250KN for a class 68) or stalling on an uphill section. Re gearing to a lower speed would help, but would it be worth it.

 

[43096]

As they stand HST power cars have no pulling power. BR in there wisdom fitted the smallest traction motors they could get away with so the maximum tractive effort is 80KN per power car. (In contrast a class 68 has 317KN of tractive effort - 4 times as much.) With anything more than a load of 400 tones per power car (less on a mountain line) there is a real risk of burning out the traction motors (continuous rating only 47KN as against 250KN for a class 68) or stalling on an uphill section. Re gearing to a lower speed would help, but would it be worth it.

BR specified power cars for power car duty, not for a solution to daft ideas 40 years later!

I really don’t get this thought of trying to reconfigure them into something else at 40 years old. They’ve had a lifetime of hard work on the most demanding duty a diesel engine has had.

 

[randyrippley]

A UK-spec Voith Gravita?

I didn't know about those, but yes - very much what I was thinking of

 

[Pete_uk]

Well 91's were intended for freight use after hours.

Saw one on a old video pulling a charter train once

 

[92002]

Isn't there a six-axle Co-Co version (on paper at least) designed for Cape Gauge that weighs in at a mere 99 tonnes? How easily could it be adapted for the UK?

The 68s are a special build as Bo-Bo for the UK. The standard model is a Co-Co as supplied to Euro Tunnel for freight in France. Which just happens to be a division of GBRf.
So would only need the body scaled down for the UK gauge.

The South Africa loco your thinking of is a Cape Gauge version of a 88.

 

[furnessvale]

The 68s are a special build as Bo-Bo for the UK. The standard model is a Co-Co as supplied to Euro Tunnel for freight in France. Which just happens to be a division of GBRf.
So would only need the body scaled down for the UK gauge.

The South Africa loco your thinking of is a Cape Gauge version of a 88.

Given how much gubbins is stuffed inside a loco, that sounds easy! NOT!

 

[LOL The Irony]

The South Africa loco your thinking of is a Cape Gauge version of a 88.

Which Voshloh got in trouble for, for bribing officials I believe.

 

[CosherB]

The 68s are a special build as Bo-Bo for the UK. The standard model is a Co-Co as supplied to Euro Tunnel for freight in France. Which just happens to be a division of GBRf.
So would only need the body scaled down for the UK gauge.

The South Africa loco your thinking of is a Cape Gauge version of a 88.

Sorry, was a division of Europorte. Sold two years ago!

 

[hwl]

Which Voshloh got in trouble for, for bribing officials I believe.

The contract was for several different types of engine - the problem was some of the locos were much bigger the cape gauge!

 

[LOL The Irony]

The contract was for several different types of engine - the problem was some of the locos were much bigger the cape gauge!

And they fixed the procurement procedure or something.

 

[hwl]

And they fixed the procurement procedure or something.

The problem was primarily with the leasing company being very dodgy.
Yep lots of brown paper envelopes (or rather transfers to key people's friend's bank accounts for consultancy, one got over R10m) and then the rolling stock engineers who weren't engineers when their qualification were checked!

Hence Stadler got good price for Vossloh Valencia due to the problems.

Stadler should still have a few spare locos sitting around in Spain that might fit the UK or be cannibalised for Euro IIIa engines...

 

[Photohunter71]

When will we hear further updates? This will as stated start as 10, but could it lead to more?

 

[JohnMcL7]

The 68s are a special build as Bo-Bo for the UK. The standard model is a Co-Co as supplied to Euro Tunnel for freight in France. Which just happens to be a division of GBRf.
So would only need the body scaled down for the UK gauge.

The South Africa loco your thinking of is a Cape Gauge version of a 88.

Have you got a link to that Co-Co locomotive?

 

[USRailFan]

Have you got a link to that Co-Co locomotive?

It's mentioned here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stadler_Euro_Dual
Was supposed to be Bo-Bo

 

[ac6000cw]

There is also a metre-gauge 'South American Light' Co-Co - https://www.railwaygazette.com/news...viaria-andina-orders-stadler-locomotives.html

The SALi locomotives to be manufactured at Stadler’s Valencia plant in Spain are derived from the Eurodual family. Stadler said the ‘ultra-lightweight’ 100 km/h 1 000 mm gauge freight locomotives for FCA would combine high-power output with reduced fuel consumption.

(my bold)

Not managed to find any info on what diesel engine is being fitted to them.

 

[the sniper]

Have you got a link to that Co-Co locomotive?

Might be worth looking at the stuff I posted about the Co-co option back on page three of this thread, post 89.

 

[JohnMcL7]

Might be worth looking at the stuff I posted about the Co-co option back on page three of this thread, post 89.

I've seen the references to co-co versions but no actual locomotives themselves the earlier post suggested there were some in use on the euro tunnel but I can't find anything of them either.